Poll: General election voting round 4

[AGD]

If this played out then conservative get the first crack at forming a government and go with ukip or lib/dem.

So much misunderstanding in this thread!

Vote share is irrelevant, only the number of seats matters and this can be significantly different from the vote share.

The first crack at forming a government would go to the party with the most seats, this looks like the conservatives (just) at present. However, it doesn't look like they would have enough support even with Lib Dems and DUP.

Labour with the SNP are more likely to be able to form a government. This is why, for now, it is most likely that Labour will be in power.

 

[elmarko]

Ironic really, had the Conservatives allowed the Liberal democrats to save face by not forcing the issue of tuition fees they would be looking at a much stronger vote share & would be splitting the 'left' vote.

The lack of tactical foresight from our political class surprises me sometimes - did they not play RTS games as children?

Surely they knew that by using them as a metaphorical human shield for all the worst policies it would cause a significant number to turn to Labour, if anything they should have gone for 'Conservative light' during the last term & attempted to pull the public slowly to the right over a few terms.

Pushing hard into welfare cuts, bedroom taxes & tuition fee's was not a smart move looking past the first term - it's likely to cost them the election.

 

[delta0]

I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

The Conservatives are going to take huge losses due to a combination of UKIP & the Liberal democrat vote haemorrhage. SNP are the only reason that the Labour party are not looking at a reliable majority.

Are you saying that in swing seats nobody is going to vote for UKIP?, or that the UKIP vote share is evenly distributed (when the data says otherwise?).

Tactical voting will kick in again and actual votes for UKIP will fall basically. Very similar to what happened with Lib Dem at the last election. There will be a strong tendency to return to Con and Lab on the actual day.

 

[Schlong&Stable]

So much misunderstanding in this thread!

Vote share is irrelevant, only the number of seats matters and this can be significantly different from the vote share.

The first crack at forming a government would go to the party with the most seats, this looks like the conservatives (just) at present. However, it doesn't look like they would have enough support even with Lib Dems and DUP.

Labour with the SNP are more likely to be able to form a government. This is why, for now, it is most likely that Labour will be in power.

If the Tories can get LIB and DUP support, they might form a minority government. I don't think Labour would push a 'no confidence' vote in the first 12-18 months because they'll be preoccupied with finding a new leader and they'll be happy to see Cameron undermined by his own party for not getting a working majority.

Labour stand to gain more from a weak Tory government than a weak Labour government. They could throw the Tories into chaos with a leadership coup brewing whilst they get rid of Miliband (their own weak link) and bring in a strong leader.

I'd be willing to bet that unless we see a major swing to one side or the other, Labour will stab Miliband in the back. Then in 18 months when Labour are strong, they'd make a no confidence vote with SNP support and win the following election.

 

[scorza]

Ironic really, had the Conservatives allowed the Liberal democrats to save face by not forcing the issue of tuition fees they would be looking at a much stronger vote share & would be splitting the 'left' vote.

The lack of tactical foresight from our political class surprises me sometimes - did they not play RTS games as children?

Or even if they'd stuck to the coalition agreement and reformed the House of Lords, then the LibDems wouldn't have blocked the boundary changes (though I'm not sure that would have been enough to get a Tory majority).

 

[ubersonic]

It will bias way more to top figures for both lab and con on the actual day.

That's already factored into the calculations (they have a lot of credibility at stake if they are out, and in Ladbrokes case a lot of money lol).

 

[ElliorR]

A Lab/LimDem coalition still wouldn't surprise me.

 

[delta0]

That's already factored into the calculations (they have a lot of credibility at stake if they are out, and in Ladbrokes case a lot of money lol).

The polls were off last time. It will bias even further in con and lab favour.

 

[joeyjojo]

Tactical voting will kick in again and actual votes for UKIP will fall basically. Very similar to what happened with Lib Dem at the last election. There will be a strong tendency to return to Con and Lab on the actual day.

The Lib Dem vote didn't collapse at the last election, they still got 23% of the vote, compared to 29% Labour and 36% Conservative. They were polling between 20 and 30% for a month either side of the general election, so most people who said they'd vote Lib Dem probably did. (Put 1/4/2010 to 1/6/2010 into this poll tracker to see for yourself http://may2015.com/category/poll-of-polls/)

What they didn't get is a proportional number of seats, only scoring 9% because of FPTP. Maybe this is what you mean?

 

[delta0]

The Lib Dem vote didn't collapse at the last election, they still got 23% of the vote, compared to 29% Labour and 36% Conservative. They were polling between 20 and 30% for a month either side of the general election, so most people who said they'd vote Lib Dem probably did. (Put 1/4/2010 to 1/6/2010 into this poll tracker to see for yourself http://may2015.com/category/poll-of-polls/)

What they didn't get is a proportional number of seats, only scoring 9% because of FPTP. Maybe this is what you mean?

That is a very important point that as a proportion of seats they didn't get many gains. Lib Dem were down on their seat prediction too by around 15%. On the actual day the tendency will be towards con and lab and so extreme movements (at least outside of Scotland) will be next none.

 

[ElliorR]

Cameron on TV right now in Lincoln as that's a marginal seat with a con majority of 1058 and he started his speech talking about the things the Tories have funded in Lincoln since 2010. I wish I lived in a marginal seat then maybe more would happen here.

 

[AGD]

If the Tories can get LIB and DUP support, they might form a minority government. I don't think Labour would push a 'no confidence' vote in the first 12-18 months because they'll be preoccupied with finding a new leader and they'll be happy to see Cameron undermined by his own party for not getting a working majority.

Labour stand to gain more from a weak Tory government than a weak Labour government. They could throw the Tories into chaos with a leadership coup brewing whilst they get rid of Miliband (their own weak link) and bring in a strong leader.

I'd be willing to bet that unless we see a major swing to one side or the other, Labour will stab Miliband in the back. Then in 18 months when Labour are strong, they'd make a no confidence vote with SNP support and win the following election.

I'm sorry but this is just completely unrealistic. If Labour/SNP have enough MPs to form the government, they will. Standing aside would be not only a tactical disaster but an affront to our democratic process. There is no way that would happen.

 

[boycey321]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ukip/11536535/manifesto-2015-summary.html

I personally think UKIP have some very good ideas in their manifesto - Seems all my life Labour blame Tories then Tories blame Labour (for previous governments) I'd like to see someone else run the country I don't like the whole idea of the same 2 lying parties running the country forever.

Also went on vote for policies and came out UKIP as my most highest % on policies I agreed with so that's who i'm voting for.

 

[joeyjojo]

Wow, damning series of blog posts about the economic policies of this government from that Oxford professor I linked in the last thread.

UK mediamacro myths: an introduction
Mediamacro myth 1: 2010 Britain faced a financial crisis
Mediamacro myth 2: Labour profligacy
Mediamacro myth 3: the 2007 boom

I haven't read them all yet (and I think there might be more on the way).

For a summary check out the article in the New Statesman:

The economic consequences of George Osborne: covering up the austerity mistake
How did the coalition government manage to transform the media debate on macroeconomics so comprehensively - and what will happen now they have?

The coalition defined itself as a government of austerity or, as its members preferred, as a government with the courage to take the hard decisions necessary to deal with the deficit. In its first two years it did what it had promised to do – and more – and as a result inflicted palpable harm on the economy. The recovery was delayed, costing the average household the equivalent of at least £4,000. In 2012 the government departed from its earlier plans and eased up on austerity, but pretended it had not.

...

Essential reading IMO, presumably on the dangers of media/popular/pub economics...

 

[Hagar]

I'm sorry but this is just completely unrealistic. If Labour/SNP have enough MPs to form the government, they will. Standing aside would be not only a tactical disaster but an affront to our democratic process. There is no way that would happen.

The party with the largest number of seats gets to try to form the next government first. By majority, coalition or minority government.

If they cannot succeed, the party with the next largest number can.

If nobody can form a stable government, Roll on the next election.

That is the FPTP system.

 

[D.P.]

Which poll do we currently believe? I've heard so many and they all seem to show a different position.

Look at any of the polls of polls, the one on bbc or may2025.com.

 

[Freakbro]

Wow, damning series of blog posts about the economic policies of this government from that Oxford professor I linked in the last thread.

UK mediamacro myths: an introduction
Mediamacro myth 1: 2010 Britain faced a financial crisis
Mediamacro myth 2: Labour profligacy
Mediamacro myth 3: the 2007 boom

I haven't read them all yet (and I think there might be more on the way).

For a summary check out the article in the New Statesman:

The economic consequences of George Osborne: covering up the austerity mistake
How did the coalition government manage to transform the media debate on macroeconomics so comprehensively - and what will happen now they have?



Essential reading IMO, presumably on the dangers of media/popular/pub economics...

Unfortunately it's going to be as effective as peeing into the wind around here, and the wider poulation in general, as everyone seems to be so entrenched with the sounbite economy the media/conservatives have spoonfed everyone with for the last 5 years.

Hell, the amount of comments on here about what a good job
Osborne has done show that.

 

[D.P.]

Conservative are only effected in a few seats that they would not benefit labour. The others are already labour seats or insignificant enough to cause a headache for conservatives like SNP have done to Labour.

I think you got that the wrong way round.

The conservatives , UKIP Nd LibDems are mostly fighting for the same seats, so if the Tories do well it will cost the lib dems and UKIP seats so doesn't change any chance of a majority.

The same happens with labour and SNP,


The end results is that Milliband will al it's certainly be in #10 if things stay as they are.

 

[StriderX]

Wow, damning series of blog posts about the economic policies of this government from that Oxford professor I linked in the last thread.

UK mediamacro myths: an introduction
Mediamacro myth 1: 2010 Britain faced a financial crisis
Mediamacro myth 2: Labour profligacy
Mediamacro myth 3: the 2007 boom

I haven't read them all yet (and I think there might be more on the way).

For a summary check out the article in the New Statesman:

The economic consequences of George Osborne: covering up the austerity mistake
How did the coalition government manage to transform the media debate on macroeconomics so comprehensively - and what will happen now they have?



Essential reading IMO, presumably on the dangers of media/popular/pub economics...

Excellent read, frankly.

Unfortunately no one really cares, unfortunately personal research is fleeting in the majority.

 

[McPhee]

So this story has me worried.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32442151


Even if the Tories win a majority by quite a few seats can Labour/snp still rule? I'm confused about the system now, does this mean any rag tag bunch with enough numbers can get together and rule by majority even if the electorate have voted by numbers for a different government?

Let's say the Tories win 290 seats, Labour win 275 seats, the SNP 50 seats and the Lib Dems 30 seats. Some would say that, as the largest party, the Tories have the right to form a government. That 'right' has no basis in the constitution though. Labour and the SNP could block the Tories from forming a government and form one themselves. While they don't have to justify it, it's easily justified by pointing out that the majority of seats fall 'left', ergo the will of the British people isn't to have a centre-right party in government.